4 ms·

I wonder how much the price of PineTime would have risen if they had made it able to run Linux. Kind of feel that whatever software is developed for it wouldn't

by jolmg 6y ago

I wonder how much the price of PineTime would have risen if they had made it able to run Linux. Kind of feel that whatever software is developed for it wouldn't have much of a future because it wouldn't be portable and interoperable with other software. For example, for a smartwatch I ultimately want to run a timekeeping app that connects to an emacs daemon (for working with org-mode buffers) through a VPN to a personal server, taking into account the watch eventually evolving to one that supports a cellular modem. Doing something worth doing, from scratch, seems too much. I wonder what their vision is. What are they hoping PineTime eventually evolves to? Are they expecting it to never stop being a companion to a phone?

jsight 6y ago
I suspect the intention is to never stop being a phone companion. Having the phone there allows the watch to be very low power, which helps greatly with battery life. It also means that goals such as yours are possible with the mere addition of a companion app on the phone. If you want more than that, you'd probably want to consider something like an Android Wear device, with the accompanying tradeoffs.
- jolmg 6y ago
  I suppose the market for smartwatches isn't so well defined. Personally, I don't see much value in smartwatches if they can't be standalone. The prime benefit for me is that they're more portable than phones. I'd like to eventually leave my phone at home. If I have to carry it, then that means the smartwatch is just more baggage to lug around with almost no benefit since nearly all functions are available in the phone, too. > If you want more than that, you'd probably want to consider something like an Android Wear device, with the accompanying tradeoffs. Yeah, I got a Gear S3, but same as my Android phone, I hope to eventually replace it with something more open.
varispeed 6y ago
Ultimately until all the loopholes are not fixed the companies will have to behave like Apple to survive (walled gardens, anti-repair agenda, data collection, Orwell's speak - e.g. touting being privacy oriented and at the same time collecting massive amount of data they don't need for other reasons than to manipulate consumers and so on).

by jolmg 6y ago

jsight 6y ago

I suspect the intention is to never stop being a phone companion. Having the phone there allows the watch to be very low power, which helps greatly with battery life. It also means that goals such as yours are possible with the mere addition of a companion app on the phone. If you want more than that, you'd probably want to consider something like an Android Wear device, with the accompanying tradeoffs.

jolmg 6y ago
I suppose the market for smartwatches isn't so well defined. Personally, I don't see much value in smartwatches if they can't be standalone. The prime benefit for me is that they're more portable than phones. I'd like to eventually leave my phone at home. If I have to carry it, then that means the smartwatch is just more baggage to lug around with almost no benefit since nearly all functions are available in the phone, too. > If you want more than that, you'd probably want to consider something like an Android Wear device, with the accompanying tradeoffs. Yeah, I got a Gear S3, but same as my Android phone, I hope to eventually replace it with something more open.

varispeed 6y ago

Ultimately until all the loopholes are not fixed the companies will have to behave like Apple to survive (walled gardens, anti-repair agenda, data collection, Orwell's speak - e.g. touting being privacy oriented and at the same time collecting massive amount of data they don't need for other reasons than to manipulate consumers and so on).